Big Content: the frenemy of consumer electronics makers

The consumer electronics industry needs content to make its shiny gadgets …

A trip to CES is a combination of candy store window shopping and a trip to some nightmarish, dystopian future with thirteen-dollar-an-hour WiFi. Beneath all of the shiny gadgets, desperate marketing pitches, bizarre keynotes and sleep deprivation, there were a number of themes emerging at CES as the manufacturers of all these shiny toys tried to latch onto something to pull themselves out of the doldrums that hung over the last year. One was the lengths device-makers will go to for content; another was the anointment of "cloud" as a critical feature check-box.

For two industries that are so dependent on each other, the relationship between the gadget industry and content creators is an awfully strained one, bordering on domestic violence. On my last day at CES, I spoke briefly with CEA President Gary Shapiro and listened to his invective about how the content industry was trying to kill the Internet. The tension between the content and consumer technology communities has been around for decades—since the creation of the cassette tape, at least—and it doesn't seem to be getting any more amicable.

Which is ironic, because the tech business has never sucked up to Big Content quite as much as it seemed to be this year at CES. After all, it's content that makes people use all the gear that was being peddled at CES, whether it be software or video or music or text. And some of the companies at CES were showing the level of desperation they had reached in trying to get exclusive content to help power their shiny Internet-connected toys.

Perhaps the most obvious instance of wretchedness came from Panasonic, which announced a new "social TV" service in partnership with MySpace. There are other ways to get Justin Timberlake to show up at your press event, Panasonic.

Samsung is so desperate to get content to sell more 3D televisions that it is essentially paying NBC to make 3D versions of shows that have gone off the air, including Battlestar Galactica. And Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer's talk about Xbox during his keynote was dominated by announcements of content deals—some old, like those with Comcast and Verizon, and some new, like those with Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. and Fox.

So can't they all just get along, and leave the poor Internet out of this? Think of the children.

Then there's cloud, a word so widely used and abused at CES that I'm starting to think its use should be restricted to talk about the weather. Cloud was to CES 2012 what untenable tablets were to last year's show. Panasonic seems to have decided everything from televisions to business phones to point-of-sale systems to digital signage needs to be wired into their proprietary cloud somehow (mostly to keep Samsung from stealing their customers). Cameras, scanners, routers, 3D printers, network-attached storage—all of them had cloud tie-ins. There was even Feedair, a little personal scrolling digital sign shaped like a cartoon balloon that ties into a cloud alert aggregator which is somehow supposed to be less intrusive than a smartphone push message or an on-screen alert.

And not only does everything have to have a cloud connection, but everyone has to have their own privately branded cloud, apparently. In an attempt to make the Internet compelling to consumers, it seems the industry wants to turn it into more walled gardens in the process—essentially guaranteeing that no one will ever use those features. Panasonic has a cloud game developer program, which I'm sure will get all sorts of traction from unemployed webOS developers.

As my MacBook Air's iCloud sync brought my connection to the press room WiFi to its knees for the fifth time, I couldn't help think what all this cloud debris was going to do to the Internet—or, for that matter, to the corporate networks that all these smartphones, cloud-connected ultrabooks, and other gadgets would be inflicted upon.

And they will be, there's no doubt. It was clear just how relentlessly consumer devices are marching into business IT. Microsoft's announcement that the Kinect's API will be shipping for Windows next month and the spread of voice, facial recongnition and gesture-based interfaces to just about everything are bound to work their way into board rooms and executive suites before long, as well as other business markets. It's bound to soon bring new meaning to "flipping off" your work computer.

52 Reader Comments

With shrinking budgets I am actually a little nervous about what all these devices will do to my network. i have an open network for people to use, but how long until they begin to bring it to its knees.....

If your totally dependent on "The Cloud", what happens when the cloud fails (eventually something will happen to make it break) and your cloud dependent devices have no 'smarts' of their own?(I plan on keeping my old box with XP-Pro in my bomb shelter just in case.)

Samsung is so desperate to get content to sell more 3D televisions that it is essentially paying NBC to make 3D versions of shows that have gone off the air, including Battlestar Galactica.

This sounds pretty lame, but how would it even work? I can see how you could do this with computer animation (e.g., Toy Story) but unless you had bi-optic cameras originally how do you make live action 3D after the fact?

Samsung is so desperate to get content to sell more 3D televisions that it is essentially paying NBC to make 3D versions of shows that have gone off the air, including Battlestar Galactica.

This sounds pretty lame, but how would it even work? I can see how you could do this with computer animation (e.g., Toy Story) but unless you had bi-optic cameras originally how do you make live action 3D after the fact?

Same way they 3D'ize existing 2D movies: heavy CGI to simulate a bi-optic camera, inclusive creation of the necessary new picture elements.

Wait, you aren't looking forward to the 3D-edition of the Star Wars hexalogy?

Whenever I hear people talking about all these cloud based services I also wonder about how maintainable it really is. Every time someone shows me their latest audio streaming app and tries to convince me that storing music on my phone is passé, I can help but think our networks would be rendered unusable if they became the norm.

Have I just been brainwashed by the carriers into thinking the spectrum is scarce and being pushed near it's limits?

3D BSG? That would really suck. One of the things that I rather enjoyed about BSG was that even though it was set in space (with the associated tech) they still used a ton of physical things: paper (with no corners! huge lol's on that), missles, bullets, ink pens...

It just wouldn't be the same as the movie that used 3D the best - Avatar - for the subtle details (holo screens etc)

If your totally dependent on "The Cloud", what happens when the cloud fails (eventually something will happen to make it break) and your cloud dependent devices have no 'smarts' of their own?(I plan on keeping my old box with XP-Pro in my bomb shelter just in case.)

The T-Mobile Sidekicks were cloud based (the original ones from Danger), and when the Danger network went out, they wouldn't have any ringtones, contacts, save files, anything. Because nothing is saved to the phone for any real length of time. Although games were installed, you wouldn't have access to any save data.

So that's what happens when they don't have storage of their own, and the cloud fails. That being said, it was easy for people to upgrade/replace the Sidekick devices because it would just download all their content.

Of course the relationship is strained - they're all working in the insane system we've created based on money, profit, trade with ritualized warfare as the chosen paradigm for how we do things.

The needs of one party run counter to the other party, and the needs of the consumer runs counter to both of them, and they all run counter to the needs of the planet - with a system that embraces the need for scarcity and absolutely requires us to keep ramping up our rape of the planet and using up our resources as quickly as possible, our entire society is sheer and utter lunacy that is wholly unsustainable into the future.

So it's hardly surprising that big content and the electronics manufacturers are at odds... they're trying to function in a completely nutty environment using insane rules. The amazing part is that our species only has one billion (one seventh of all) people starving to death at the moment considering how we do things...

After all, it's content that makes people use all the gear that was being peddled at CES, whether it be software or video or music or text.

PLEASE don't play right into the content industries' hands with statements like this. They already believe that their content is all-important, that none of us would use anything electronic without it. The truth is of course quite different. Truly user-generated content is becoming more and more important, but it pales in comparison to simple communication. One need look no further than the telephone network to see that communication between people is enough to support an entire technology without any content at all from the content industries.

Yes, big content is desirable to most people to a greater or lesser degree. But it's not necessarily what makes people use all that gear being peddled.

3D BSG? That would really suck. One of the things that I rather enjoyed about BSG was that even though it was set in space (with the associated tech) they still used a ton of physical things: paper (with no corners! huge lol's on that), missles, bullets, ink pens...

It just wouldn't be the same as the movie that used 3D the best - Avatar - for the subtle details (holo screens etc)

Anything to get the mindless Consumers to buy 3D.Well I am never buying into 3D and until they have a Holodeck I could care less.Same as the whole Cloud Thing.The only cloud I see from Big Content now is a really bad Hurricane.Furthermore I Boycott anything that Big Content does unless I purchase it used and physical.Screw SOPA/PIPA/OPEN

If your totally dependent on "The Cloud", what happens when the cloud fails (eventually something will happen to make it break) and your cloud dependent devices have no 'smarts' of their own?(I plan on keeping my old box with XP-Pro in my bomb shelter just in case.)

The T-Mobile Sidekicks were cloud based (the original ones from Danger), and when the Danger network went out, they wouldn't have any ringtones, contacts, save files, anything. Because nothing is saved to the phone for any real length of time. Although games were installed, you wouldn't have access to any save data.

So that's what happens when they don't have storage of their own, and the cloud fails. That being said, it was easy for people to upgrade/replace the Sidekick devices because it would just download all their content.

When you store your stuff in a place that belongs to someone else, you loose control of the stuff. Who owns the space (in this case cloud)? Businesses come and go; I have one of those now fairly useless Sidekicks. And, our government is in the mix also... Storage is not so dear that I feel a need to put things where other folks can mess with them (mostly). Although even I use webmail... Sometimes I think they call it the cloud because the whole concept is nebulous...

About the only cloud approaches that have sounded interesting to me have been the iTunes and Amazon mp3 storage "cloud", since they're giving up free storage space for my mp3 collection. And I'm already using those... Thanks guys!

Whenever I hear people talking about all these cloud based services I also wonder about how maintainable it really is. Every time someone shows me their latest audio streaming app and tries to convince me that storing music on my phone is passé, I can help but think our networks would be rendered unusable if they became the norm.

Have I just been brainwashed by the carriers into thinking the spectrum is scarce and being pushed near it's limits?

There is truth to both, though there are also techniques for extending both as well. I imagine that spectrum can be shared with everyone in endless ways. Generally, carriers don't really want to get into extending their networks and carrying capacity. That can be expensive, and the payback may not be clear.

So, cloud was supposed to free people. Prevent them from being shackled to their content at one location, by letting them access it anywhere they went. But, that would be way too cool. Instead, they want to come up with proprietary clouds that promote vendor lock-in; can only get accessed via this device, but only if it's talking to this other device, and only if you've passed these DRM check-points, and only if you're in these specific cities on this specific network, and you haven't gone over your bandwidth limits.

I'll stay out of this game until they stop being so schizophrenic about it.

About the only cloud approaches that have sounded interesting to me have been the iTunes and Amazon mp3 storage "cloud", since they're giving up free storage space for my mp3 collection. And I'm already using those... Thanks guys!

Would Steam qualify as a cloud? (you dl the games from it instead of using it online, so maybe not). So far, I'm ok with it. But I still worry about the day it goes away, and what would happen to the games I bought on it.

Don't forget that while manufacturers are pushing cloud/sync/online blah-blah, all the ISPs and wireless providers are capping our data. Great combo.

And I just picked up a new plasma TV - without 3D - my little way of giving them the middle finger regarding 3D. Although I admit, I was briefly tempted when the store showed the equivalent model with slightly better black level and 3D for "only" $100 more. Until I asked "How many glasses does it come with?" and was told "None." Comical.

After all, it's content that makes people use all the gear that was being peddled at CES, whether it be software or video or music or text.

PLEASE don't play right into the content industries' hands with statements like this. They already believe that their content is all-important, that none of us would use anything electronic without it. The truth is of course quite different. Truly user-generated content is becoming more and more important, but it pales in comparison to simple communication. One need look no further than the telephone network to see that communication between people is enough to support an entire technology without any content at all from the content industries.

Yes, big content is desirable to most people to a greater or lesser degree. But it's not necessarily what makes people use all that gear being peddled.

I think the metric is the answer to the question,"Does it need content to be viable in the marketplace?". That's why the relationship between content creators and makers of tools that make it easy to consume content is so tumultuous.

I think there is actually a quote from Socrates somewhere about how this new fangled thing called writing is rotting peoples ability to remember.

Yeah, it's in Phaedrus. I've heard similar comments made in recent years re. the internet. i.e. "young folks these days don't know anything, they just know how to find it on Google" (Socrates would have said something like "they don't know anything, they just write it down"). I think his concern was that access-to-information and understanding are not the same thing. History has shown this concern to be valid: we as a society are drowning in data right now and dont' know how to make any sense of it.

Back on topic, these proprietary cloud services are made of fail. People want their devices to work with the services they already use, they don't want to start using a bunch of new services everytime they buy a new device. The way to make you devices work with existing services is to develop and support open standards. It's that simple.

Perhaps we need a new word for "locked-down, proprietary cloud service". "Balloon" maybe?

I imagine a day when your television, your computer, your fridge, your car, your bed, and your shower all have cameras that watch you 24/7. Attempting to detect when you are present and what you need. I imagine those sensors being hacked and youtube videos of thousands of naked people showering and singing that stupid Friday song poorly going up. Perhaps a particularly high end shower has a "Junk in the Trunk" feature that zooms down and scans your nether regions to search for remnants of unclean using whizz-bang virtual processing and heat scans. Giving would-be hackers an easy way to virtually capture your entire undercarriage...

Or the car that talks back. "Reduce the temperature by five degrees." "I can't do that, Dave. Increasing temperature by 25 degrees." "Stop that. I said decrease it." "I continue to be unable to do that, Dave. Increasing temperature by 25 more degrees." "Why do you keep calling me, Dave?" "I don't know, Dave. Your life signs are fluctuating. Please take slow, deep breaths. I am contacting an emergency room and redirecting our course to the nearest location with medical options. Also, I am increasing the temperature by 25 more degrees. Dave." "Wait, you're turning off the wrong way, we're headed into incoming traffic! STOP STOOOOP!!" "We will arrive in 34 seconds. Please enhance your calm. Do not worry, Dave, everything is under contr--"

I just don't trust a future where devices are talked to and talk back, where they are web-connected all the time, where they have cameras to watch you and mics to hear you, and where so much of that interaction is being run by off-site hardware. It makes me want to live "off the grid" simply by buying devices without all these contrivances, which seems contradictory to using these features as features. If they seem like problems in every bit of the, "The more they overtake the plumbing," sense of the word.

So, cloud was supposed to free people. Prevent them from being shackled to their content at one location, by letting them access it anywhere they went. But, that would be way too cool. Instead, they want to come up with proprietary clouds that promote vendor lock-in; can only get accessed via this device, but only if it's talking to this other device, and only if you've passed these DRM check-points, and only if you're in these specific cities on this specific network, and you haven't gone over your bandwidth limits.

I'll stay out of this game until they stop being so schizophrenic about it.

Differentiation is the name of the game in consumer electronics my friend. You're never going to see an all encompassing cloud for these products.

"Tradition asserts that, sometimes around 560, he became involved in a quarrel with Saint Finnian of Movilla Abbey over a psalter. Columba copied the manuscript at the scriptorium under Saint Finnian, intending to keep the copy. Saint Finnian disputed his right to keep the copy. The dispute eventually led to the pitched Battle of Cúl Dreimhne in 561, during which many men were killed. A synod of clerics and scholars threatened to excommunicate him for these deaths, but St. Brendan of Birr spoke on his behalf with the result that he was allowed to go into exile instead. Columba suggested that he would work as a missionary in Scotland to help convert as many people as had been killed in the battle. "

Of course the relationship is strained - they're all working in the insane system we've created based on money, profit, trade with ritualized warfare as the chosen paradigm for how we do things.

The needs of one party run counter to the other party, and the needs of the consumer runs counter to both of them, and they all run counter to the needs of the planet - with a system that embraces the need for scarcity and absolutely requires us to keep ramping up our rape of the planet and using up our resources as quickly as possible, our entire society is sheer and utter lunacy that is wholly unsustainable into the future.

So it's hardly surprising that big content and the electronics manufacturers are at odds... they're trying to function in a completely nutty environment using insane rules. The amazing part is that our species only has one billion (one seventh of all) people starving to death at the moment considering how we do things...

"The need for scarcity"? I'm pretty sure almost everything except copies of data has a finite supply and is thus scarce. And since you started up with nutty ranting, here's mine. I really don't understand this idea that it's wrong to change the world. The only downsides to global warming come because of borders. Staying on our trends we'll have more arable land in a 100 years than we do now and the places where people are currently starving will become mostly unlivable, forcing them to move to where there's food. The only people global warming is bad for are the rich that own beach front property and the political elite.